Meaningful feedback is a key element in developing an online environment that promotes growth and learning. However, it has been noted that meaningful feedback must be timely, personal, manageable, motivational, and directly related to the assessment criteria (Hatziapostolou & Paraskakis, 2010, p. 111). In addition, supplying guidelines for constructing feedback has proven to be more effective than randomly generated comments (Palloff & Pratt, 2005, p. 49-50).
There are multiple strategies that work well for promoting meaningful feedback in online discussions. I feel one of the most influential methods is for the instructor to model the behavior that is expected from the students. Palloff and Pratt (2005) identify this as ‘setting the stage’ (p. 34). If an instructor demonstrates the concept of meaningful feedback, students are able to immediately understand what this type of feedback looks like and will in turn be more apt to follow the model. Palloff and Pratt (2005) also noted that overachievers should be slowed down and underachievers should pick up the pace (p. 34). Whether this is through e-mail, telephone, or another type of contact, it is important that all learners work somewhat at the same pace for the collaborative environment to be effective. If an instructor opens up all 10 discussion boards for the entire course, some students will complete all 10 in the first week. Other students will wait until the last day before it is due to complete it. Those whom work ahead typically don’t go back and those whom are struggling to keep caught up get discouraged and find it difficult to learn. Much like a traditional classroom, if the overachievers have already left class for the day and the underachievers haven’t even shown up, it is difficult to develop a sense of community and collaboration in the classroom.
The physical ability for learners to provide meaningful feedback requires they have functional technology. I routinely hear the excuse of students not being able to complete an assignment because their computer ‘crashed’ or they ‘lost their files’. As an instructor in a digital classroom, it is important to provide the students with some basic technological backup-plan skills at the onset of a course. Students who continually loose files will benefit from cloudware products such as Google Docs which store files on servers in the clouds and provides access from any computer that has internet capabilities. For students who have a less than adequate computer, it is vital for those students to understand that although their computer ‘crashed’ it is still their responsibility to ensure their assignments are getting turned in on time. Computers that ‘crash’ are frustrating and may cause delays in the ability to complete an assignment but it should in no way be an excuse for not completing an assignment. Most learners have family and friends with computers whom would be happy to share, in addition, most libraries and educational institutions have computers for public use. The key emphasis is that although a defunct computer may cause delays, it does not stop progress.
References Espasa, A., & Meneses, J. (2010). Analyzing feedback processes in an online teaching and learning environment: an exploratory study. Higher Education, 59(3), 277-292. doi:10.1007/s10734-009-9247-4
Gielen, S., Tops, L., Dochy, F., Onghena, P., & Smeets, S. (2010). A comparative study of peer and teacher feedback and of various peer feedback forms in a secondary school writing curriculum. British Educational Research Journal, 36(1), 143-162. doi:10.1080/01411920902894070
Nelson, M. M., & Schunn, C. D. (2009). The nature of feedback: how different types of peer feedback affect writing performance. Instructional Science, 37(4), 375-401. doi:10.1007/s11251-008-9053-x
Palloff, R.M., & Pratt, K. (2005). Collaborating online. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
References
Espasa, A., & Meneses, J. (2010). Analyzing feedback processes in an online teaching and learning environment: an exploratory study. Higher Education, 59(3), 277-292. doi:10.1007/s10734-009-9247-4
Gielen, S., Tops, L., Dochy, F., Onghena, P., & Smeets, S. (2010). A comparative study of peer and teacher feedback and of various peer feedback forms in a secondary school writing curriculum. British Educational Research Journal, 36(1), 143-162. doi:10.1080/01411920902894070
Nelson, M. M., & Schunn, C. D. (2009). The nature of feedback: how different types of peer feedback affect writing performance. Instructional Science, 37(4), 375-401. doi:10.1007/s11251-008-9053-x
Activity 8: Meaningful Feedback
Listen to this activity.Meaningful feedback is a key element in developing an online environment that promotes growth and learning. However, it has been noted that meaningful feedback must be timely, personal, manageable, motivational, and directly related to the assessment criteria (Hatziapostolou & Paraskakis, 2010, p. 111). In addition, supplying guidelines for constructing feedback has proven to be more effective than randomly generated comments (Palloff & Pratt, 2005, p. 49-50).
There are multiple strategies that work well for promoting meaningful feedback in online discussions. I feel one of the most influential methods is for the instructor to model the behavior that is expected from the students. Palloff and Pratt (2005) identify this as ‘setting the stage’ (p. 34). If an instructor demonstrates the concept of meaningful feedback, students are able to immediately understand what this type of feedback looks like and will in turn be more apt to follow the model. Palloff and Pratt (2005) also noted that overachievers should be slowed down and underachievers should pick up the pace (p. 34). Whether this is through e-mail, telephone, or another type of contact, it is important that all learners work somewhat at the same pace for the collaborative environment to be effective. If an instructor opens up all 10 discussion boards for the entire course, some students will complete all 10 in the first week. Other students will wait until the last day before it is due to complete it. Those whom work ahead typically don’t go back and those whom are struggling to keep caught up get discouraged and find it difficult to learn. Much like a traditional classroom, if the overachievers have already left class for the day and the underachievers haven’t even shown up, it is difficult to develop a sense of community and collaboration in the classroom.
The physical ability for learners to provide meaningful feedback requires they have functional technology. I routinely hear the excuse of students not being able to complete an assignment because their computer ‘crashed’ or they ‘lost their files’. As an instructor in a digital classroom, it is important to provide the students with some basic technological backup-plan skills at the onset of a course. Students who continually loose files will benefit from cloudware products such as Google Docs which store files on servers in the clouds and provides access from any computer that has internet capabilities. For students who have a less than adequate computer, it is vital for those students to understand that although their computer ‘crashed’ it is still their responsibility to ensure their assignments are getting turned in on time. Computers that ‘crash’ are frustrating and may cause delays in the ability to complete an assignment but it should in no way be an excuse for not completing an assignment. Most learners have family and friends with computers whom would be happy to share, in addition, most libraries and educational institutions have computers for public use. The key emphasis is that although a defunct computer may cause delays, it does not stop progress.
References
Espasa, A., & Meneses, J. (2010). Analyzing feedback processes in an online teaching and learning environment: an exploratory study. Higher Education, 59(3), 277-292. doi:10.1007/s10734-009-9247-4
Gielen, S., Tops, L., Dochy, F., Onghena, P., & Smeets, S. (2010). A comparative study of peer and teacher feedback and of various peer feedback forms in a secondary school writing curriculum. British Educational Research Journal, 36(1), 143-162. doi:10.1080/01411920902894070
Hatziapostolou, T., & Paraskakis, I. (2010). Enhancing the impact of formative feedback on student learning through an online feedback system. Electronic Journal of e-Learning, 8(2), 111-122. Retrieved from http://web.ebscohost.com.proxy1.ncu.edu/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?sid=1d179610-bed9-4c08-bb34-5abd2fdab524%40sessionmgr114&vid=10&hid=107.
Nelson, M. M., & Schunn, C. D. (2009). The nature of feedback: how different types of peer feedback affect writing performance. Instructional Science, 37(4), 375-401. doi:10.1007/s11251-008-9053-x
Palloff, R.M., & Pratt, K. (2005). Collaborating online. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
References
Espasa, A., & Meneses, J. (2010). Analyzing feedback processes in an online teaching and learning environment: an exploratory study. Higher Education, 59(3), 277-292. doi:10.1007/s10734-009-9247-4
Gielen, S., Tops, L., Dochy, F., Onghena, P., & Smeets, S. (2010). A comparative study of peer and teacher feedback and of various peer feedback forms in a secondary school writing curriculum. British Educational Research Journal, 36(1), 143-162. doi:10.1080/01411920902894070
Hatziapostolou, T., & Paraskakis, I. (2010). Enhancing the impact of formative feedback on student learning through an online feedback system. Electronic Journal of e-Learning, 8(2), 111-122. Retrieved from http://web.ebscohost.com.proxy1.ncu.edu/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?sid=1d179610-bed9-4c08-bb34-5abd2fdab524%40sessionmgr114&vid=10&hid=107.
Nelson, M. M., & Schunn, C. D. (2009). The nature of feedback: how different types of peer feedback affect writing performance. Instructional Science, 37(4), 375-401. doi:10.1007/s11251-008-9053-x
Palloff, R.M., & Pratt, K. (2005). Coll